1

Hans von Storchwith material provided by Dennis Bray, Insa Meinke, Armineh Barkhordarian, Ralf Weisse, Beate Ratter,

Katharina Phillip, Marcus Reckermann, Katja Woth

and after discussions with Nico Stehr, Werner Krauß, Roger Pielke, Jerry Ravetz and Reiner Grundmann

Institute of Coastal Research, Helmholtz Zentrum Geesthacht

Germany

8 October 2014, Praha, EMS 2014 / ECAC

Ten years of implementing regional climate service –

practice and lessons

2

Challenges in science – stakeholder interactions

Many … here two issues out of a larger range

3

Ratter, Philipp, von Storch, 2012: Between Hype and Decline – Recent Trends in Public Perception of Climate Change, Environ. Sci. & Pol. 18 (2012) 3-8Bray, D., 2010: The scientific consensus of climate change revisited. Env. Sci. Pol. 13: 340 – 350

A challenge: Different perceptions among scientists and the public

4

Bray, 2011, pers. comm.

How strongly do you employ the following sources of information, for deciding about issues related to climate adaptation?

Regional administrators in German Baltic Sea coastal regions.

Another challenge: Stakeholder do hardly interlink directly with climate scientists

5

One of the key elements involved in the challenges:

The knowledge market

6

Climate Change: Constructions

• Climate change is a „constructed“ issue. People hardly experience „climate change“. (“Constructed” does not mean "made up" or "invented“, but originating from an abstract context, which may be quite divorced from day-to-day reality. )

• One construction is scientific, i.e., an „objective“ analysis of observations and interpretation by theories.

• The other construction is cultural, in particular maintained and transformed by the public media.

• Climate science is in a post-normal phase (where interest-led utility is a significant driver, and less so “normal” curiosity)

Jerry Ravetz, Silvio Funtovicz, 1986 and earlier

State of science, when facts uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high and decisions urgent.

Postnormal science

von Storch, H., 2009: Climate Research and Policy Advice: Scientific and Cultural Constructions of Knowledge. Env. Science Pol. 12, 741-747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.04.008

7

Lund and Stockholm

Two different construction of „climate change“ – scientific and cultural – which is more powerful?

Cultural: „Klimakatastrophe“

Scientific: man-made change is real, can be mitigated to some extent but not completely avoided

Storms

Tem

pera

ture

8

• The science-policy/public interaction is not an issue of the linear model of „knowledge speaks to power“.

• The problem is not that the public is stupid or uneducated.• Science has failed to respond to legitimate public questions and has

instead requested. “Trust us, we are scientists”.• Climate science is taking place under post-normal conditions. • The problem is that the scientific knowledge is confronted on the

„explanation market“ with other forms of knowledge. Scientific knowledge does not necessarily “win” this competition.

• Non-sustainable claims-making by climate change (stealth) advocates to the public has lead to fatigue.

• Overselling goes with loss of “capital” of science, namely public trust.

Knowledge market

9

One tool:

regional climate services

Using our own experience with the 8-year experience in setting up and running the “Norddeutsches Klimabüro”, headed by Insa Meinke.

10

An institution set up to enable communication between science and stakeholders• that is: making sure that science understands the questions and concerns of

a variety of stakeholders• that is: making sure that the stakeholders understand the scientific

assessments and their limits.

Provision of stakeholders with relevant knowledge, information and data about regional climate change, its perspectives and probable causes

Recognition and analysis of

• post-normal situation (politicization of issues),

• alternative knowledge claims,

• other drivers also changing environmental conditions

Regional climate service

Regional climate service comprises …

1. Building a dialogue with public and deciders

2. Dealing with the issues of

- present change (consistency with scenarios)- perspectives (projections vs. predictions)- reality of culturally constructed knowledge about climate, climate change and climate impact

- confusion because of differently used terminology- discrimination between legitimate scientific knowledge and politically motivated knowledge claims- post-normal conditioning of climate research

3. Provision of - robust (homogeneous) data - robust knowledge

von Storch, H. and I. Meinke, 2008: Regional climate offices and regional assessment reports needed. Nature geosciences 1 (2), 78

12

Determining social reality:the Hamburg survey since 2008

Every spring since 2008, the survey the company FORSA is tasked to telephone-survey about 500 people in Hamburg about their opinions about climate and climate change.

Climate change is considered a relevant issue – when directly asked if so. Otherwise it is not a topic among the 10 most significant issues.

Attention and concern varies, without systematic changes.

Storm surges are

considered the most important risks in Hamburg.

Ratter, Phillip, ongoing work; Ratter, Philipp, von Storch, 2012: Between Hype and Decline – Recent Trends in Public Perception of Climate Change, Environ. Sci. & Pol. 18 (2012) 3-8

13

The IPCC provides the following operational definitions :

“A projection is a potential future evolution …” and “A climate prediction or climate forecast is the result of an attempt to produce an estimate of the actual evolution of the climate in the future …”

But in practice these terms are mixed up.

Bray and von Storch (2009) find that • about 29% of climate scientists call

“most probable developments” projections,

• while about 20% “possible developments” are labeled “predictions”.

Determining social reality:

the confusion about „Projections and predictions“

Bray, D., and H. von Storch, 2009: 'Prediction' or 'Projection'? The nomenclature of climate science. Sci. Comm. 30, 534-543

14

Observed and projected temperature trends (1982-2011)

The observed trends are beyond the range of natural variability. In DJA and MAM the change may be explained with GHG alone; in JJA and SON other causes are also needed.

Observed CRU, EOBS (1982-2011)

Consistency of recent regional change:Baltic Sea Region

Projected GS signal, A1B scenario 10 simulations (ENSEMBLES)

Red bars – natural variability – for detection of a non-natural causeBlack bar – uncertainty of scenarios – for consistency of recent trend with cause described in scenarios

15

Difference betwenn peak heights of storm surges in Cuxhaven and Hamburg

Main cause for recently elevated storm surges in Hamburg is the modification of the river Elbe – (coastal defense and shipping channel deepening) and less so because of changing storms or sea level.

Consistency of recent local change:Storm surges in Hamburg

von Storch, H. and K. Woth, 2008: Storm surges, perspectives and options. Sustainability Science 3, 33-44

16

Raw data from 12 regional climate projectionsAnalyzed for Northern Germany and Pomeranian BightInteractive user interfaceSimilar system adapted by German Weather System

Tools for regional climate servicing Klimaatlas / atlas klimatu

http://www.ujscieodry-atlasklimatu.plhttp://www.norddeutscher-klimaatlas.de

17

Assessments of knowledge about regional climate change

- for the recent past (200 years), for present change and possible future change- consensus of what is scientifically documented- documentation of contested issues.for+ Baltic Sea (BACC) – BACC 1 done in 2008, BACC 2 in final editing phase+ Hamburg region (published November 2010)+ North Sea (in final phase)Full reports and condensed reports for general public.

Tools for regional climate servicing climate con/dis-sensus reports

Reckermann, M., H.-J. Isemer and H. von Storch, 2008: Climate Change Assessment for the Baltic Sea Basin. EOS Trans. Amer. Geophys. U., 161-162

18

GKSS in GeesthachtThe CoastDat data set:• Model generated data sets• Long (60 years) and high-resolution reconstructions of recent offshore

and coastal conditions mainly in terms of wind, storms, waves, surges and currents and other variables in N Europe

• Scenarios (100 years) of possible consistent futures of coastal and offshore conditions.

• extensions – ecological variables and other regions: Baltic Sea, E Asia, Laptev Sea

Clients:• Governmental: various coastal agencies dealing with coastal defense

and coastal traffic• Companies: assessments of risks (ship and offshore building and

operations) and opportunities (wind energy)• General public / media: explanations of causes of change; perspectives

and options of change

Tools for regional climate servicing homogeneous data sets of past and future change

19

Wave Energy Flux [kW/m]

Currents Power [W/m2]

Some applications of

- Ship design- Navigational safety- Offshore wind- Interpretation of measurements- Oils spill risk and chronic oil

pollution- Ocean energy- Scenarios of storm surge conditions- Scenarios of future wave conditions

20

Norddeutsches Klimabüro:activities and main clients

21

Concluding remarks

So … what?

22

• Climate change is a „constructed“ issue. People hardly experience „climate change“.

• One construction is scientific, i.e. an „objective“ analysis of observations and interpretation by theories.

• The other construction is cultural, in particular maintained and transformed by the public media.

• Climate science operates in a post-normal situation, which goes along with a tendency of politicizing science, and scientizing politics. Cultural science need to support climate science to deal with this challenge.

• The cultural and scientific constructions mix.• The utility of scientific assertions in the political arena compete with

their accuracy.

Take home: knowledge about climate

23

• Climate Science needs to offer “Climate Service”, which includes the establishment of a dialogue with the public and stakeholders –recognizing the socio-cultural dynamics of the issue.

• Climate service must take into account competing alternative knowledge claims.

• Climate Service should adhere to the principle of sustainability – building trust by avoiding overselling and being explicit in spelling out contested issues.

• Climate Service is more than providing data to mostly anonymous clients; direct interaction is in many cases needed.

• Also precise language should be used, no more “the science is settled”, no cavalier usage of the term “predictions”, when “projections” are meant.

Regional climate service as mechanismfor interacting with public and stakeholders

24

For further reading

• von Storch, H., 2014: Klimaservice: Nachhaltig "Vorhersagen"? Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 31-32/2014, 41-46

• Krauss, W., and H., von Storch, 2012: Post-Normal Practices Between Regional Climate Services and Local Knowledge. nature and culture 7: 213-230

• Ratter, B., K. Philipp and H. von Storch, 2012: Between Hype and Decline – Recent Trends in Public Perception of Climate Change, Env. Sci. Pol. 18, 3-8

• von Storch, H., I. Meinke, N. Stehr, B. Ratter, W. Krauss, R.A. Pielke jr., R. Grundmann, M. Reckermann and R. Weisse, 2011: Regional Climate Services illustrated with experiences from Northern Europe. J. Env. Law Pol. 1/2011, 1-15

• Bray, D., 2010: The scientific consensus of climate change revisited. Env. Sci. Pol. 13: 340 – 350

• von Storch, H., 2009: Climate Research and Policy Advice: Scientific and Cultural Constructions of Knowledge. Env. Sci. Pol. 12, 741-747

• von Storch, H. and I. Meinke, 2008: Regional climate offices and regional assessment reports needed. Nature geosciences 1, 78